New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-04-11
A DECISION UNDER THE NEW LAW

| JUDGE DEADY, OF OREGON, HOLDS THAT 1T DOES
NOT APPLY TO RAIL COMPETING WITH WATER
ROUTES.
| ST. PAUL, April 10 (SpceiaD.-A highly important
decision has been rendered by Judge Deady In 'ho
United States Circuit Court Of Oregon IL prac'i'
cay nullifes the Interstate Commerce law, 20 lar
1t affects railroads competing with water routes.
Tho which the decision was mnde was that u,
the receiver Of the oregon and California RAILROAD
Company, a road lying wholly in Oregon The re-
coiver acting under instructions OF this court mas
been carry ing Oregon grain for San Francisco noni
points along the rod where competition exists WIN
the Oregon Pacific Railroad Company at special aho
lower rates than those grain for Portland on tho
ground that such products orc taken from Portland
to San Francisco at special rate the steamers OF
the Oregon Railway and Navigation Company tna'
such steamers also carry goods at special rates o
their return trip from San Francisco to Portland,
destined to points along the limo OF the oregon ana
California Road, which gools are carried on the istto
road to their places OF destination ut speciai anu
lower than those charged for goods shipped IRON
Portland for Other and noncompctng points on sa'd
railroad that tho Oregon Pacific Railroad Company
Is operating line Of railways In conjunction WIN
line OF steamers batwecn Yaquna Bay. Oregon ana
San Francisco, and Il avowcdy carrying freight W
points the Oregon and California road at cost ana
that unless tina receiver is allowed to mako spechi
rate for freight between the points subject TO THIS
competition said road will not DO able TO retain us
share Of business; that although the Oregon and
California Railway Company and the Oregon Raf
way and Navigation Comply In making special rates
as aforesaid obtain ZACH for itself the carriage Oh
goods which otherwise they might lose Yet thero
Is no agreement or guarantee between them on the
subject nor Is such freight ever shppch on through
bill Of ading or tho one party Ill
any way made Liable for thcdcfault or mis-
carriage OF the other. In respect thereto
but each for itsclf carries tho same over lts own
route IL being understood by the shipper that they
send goods by these lines they will be carried over
each at a certain reduco rate, and that tho oregon
igation steamers not under any common CONTROL
management or arrangement for continuous car
rage shipment unless the facts herein stated make
them and this point the receiver asks the al
vice and direction Of the court Judge Deadly rules
First-Interstate commerce. tho transportation Of
property from State TO another IL Interstate com
merce, whether the carriers engaged In moving IT, or
the vehicles In which ia Is borne, tho line OF
the State not
second-Ihe Interstate Commerce act d,cs not In
clude apply TO all carriers engaged In interstate
commerce, but only 10 such a railway, a
railway and water craft under common control
agement arrangement for n continuous carriage
shipment OF property from stats TO another. nor
does II apply 10 the carriage OF property OF rail wholly
within the State, although shipped from or destined
to place without the State, that such place j.
not in foreign country.
Third-Hcld that tho Oregon AMI California road
CATION Company In the carraye OF the goods In
question: not used under common control and
for n continuous Garage. shipment
and from san Francisco, within the intent and
Ing ~ the act. and that the carriage and handling OF
said goods. 50 far n tho receiver j. concerned
performed on forms specially exempted by tho terms
Of tho act from Its operation: provided the same arc
not directly shipped to or from foreign country.